Does the penalty for not having insurance grant one health insurance as a result of paying the tax? If not, is the tax merely a tool to enforce those to get health insurance?

What about people like me who are students, over 26 years old, where health coverage is lacking

No. The tax is just the stick to get you to go eat the carrot. You get nothing in return for it.

If you are a student without health insurance I suggest you go get yourself an individual plan. I didn't go to college until I was 22, so by the time I got to the end I had aged out off my parent's plan. I went through BCBS and got an individual plan for ~$75/month.

I doubt if the tax will include automatic enrollment for insurance coverage because the tax is much lower than the CBO's estimated $4,000-5,000 annual cost for insurance purchased through the government exchange.

Does the penalty for not having insurance grant one health insurance as a result of paying the tax? If not, is the tax merely a tool to enforce those to get health insurance?

What about people like me who are students, over 26 years old, where health coverage is lacking

Is there no provision for affordable insurance for students over 26? It seems that there would be given that many upper grads are over 26. I would think there must be some provision. In general for students who don't have parents or don't have parents with insurance .

What about people like me who are students, over 26 years old, where health coverage is lacking

A lot of this will come into sharp focus in less than 12 months time. By Jan 1, 2014, all states must have health insurance exchanges up and running. States that don't comply will have the federal government step in and run them instead.

As I understand it, these exchanges take the form of websites where you can shop for competitive plans like the Massachusetts exchange. It might be worth checking it out to get an idea of how it might work in your state.

Some bullets from Wikipedia:

• Insurers will not be permitted to refuse to insure any individuals
• Limit to price variations: prices will vary based on four factors and not beyond a total factor of approximately 10
• Plans will be offered in four comparable tiers ranging from bronze to platinum with limited out of pocket expenses
• Strict regulations on rescission
• Lifetime and annual limits eliminated

Is there no provision for affordable insurance for students over 26? It seems that there would be given that many upper grads are over 26. I would think there must be some provision. In general for students who don't have parents or don't have parents with insurance .

Contact an independent health-insurance broker. For a healthy person of that age I would expect to find plenty of options with lower cost than the penalty, especially if one is willing to go with higher deductible amounts.

Does the penalty for not having insurance grant one health insurance as a result of paying the tax? If not, is the tax merely a tool to enforce those to get health insurance?

What about people like me who are students, over 26 years old, where health coverage is lacking

I believe it is also a matter of income. If you're a student without any, then you probably qualify for Medicaid or a subsidy. Since so few states have created exchanges, there are a lot of unanswered questions. I think we'll know more by Juluy

I believe it is also a matter of income. If you're a student without any, then you probably qualify for Medicaid or a subsidy. Since so few states have created exchanges, there are a lot of unanswered questions. I think we'll know more by Juluy

That depends heavily on the state you're from. Up here, you can't get on Medicaid unless you are a child. Well you can as a zero-income adult (or a negative income adult, like me) if you have children; but you have to win the lottery, literally.

At the moment, there is a fixed enrollment and there are way more people who qualify and are seeking help than there are openings in the program. When someone leaves the program, they randomly select someone from the waiting list to take their place. You are not any more or less likely to be selected if you've been on the list for a long time either, you just have to be plain old lucky.

That depends heavily on the state you're from. Up here, you can't get on Medicaid unless you are a child. Well you can as a zero-income adult (or a negative income adult, like me) if you have children; but you have to win the lottery, literally.

At the moment, there is a fixed enrollment and there are way more people who qualify and are seeking help than there are openings in the program. When someone leaves the program, they randomly select someone from the waiting list to take their place. You are not any more or less likely to be selected if you've been on the list for a long time either, you just have to be plain old lucky.

I've not been able to get a subsidy either.

I was referring to the changes that will take place on 2014, but you're right, not all states will be expanding Medicaid.

Even if it were, so what? Insurance companies have been rationing healthcare forever.

So it's ok when the government does it, but not your insurance company?

It's probably going to start with limited organs, like heart, kidneys, and liver. IPAB will start looking at who will live the longest with this transplant and give most back to society. When this happens can we start calling them death panels?

Oh, so in other words you're afraid of the boogey man. All insurance must by its very definition control costs and ration care. The government doing it at least gives you recourse if they screw up. If your insurance company does it, for profit, then you're screwed.

You have been completely snookered by the propaganda that came out of the GOP right-wing echo chamber.

There are no death panels, and the government doing this is far, far better than any insurance company. At least there is accountability.

No I am afraid of a one size fits all solution. The lack of competition.

----------

Yeah, maybe Hilary Clinton can take full responsibility for failures in Obamacare too.

So you want the competition which has driven up the healthcare cost in the US way out of line with the rest of the developed world?
If it was so great then healthcare cost would be coming down not sky rocketing way out of line with everyone else.

Competition doesn't drive up cost, it drives them down. It's the lack of competition and the flooding of government into the system that has driven cost up.

Just because there is more than one insurance company, doesn't mean their is competition. Many people do not have a choice with their insurance.

Through my current employer, I have the choice of Aetna or nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodimus Prime

So you want the competition which has driven up the healthcare cost in the US way out of line with the rest of the developed world?
If it was so great then healthcare cost would be coming down not sky rocketing way out of line with everyone else.

Competition doesn't drive up cost, it drives them down. It's the lack of competition and the flooding of government into the system that has driven cost up.

Just because there is more than one insurance company, doesn't mean their is competition. Many people do not have a choice with their insurance.

Through my current employer, I have the choice of Aetna or nothing.

You do realize that nothing you just said is supported by any facts other than perhaps your choices of health care. If you want a better healthcare plan from your employer, or more choices, you should start a union.

Competition doesn't drive up cost, it drives them down. It's the lack of competition and the flooding of government into the system that has driven cost up.

Just because there is more than one insurance company, doesn't mean their is competition. Many people do not have a choice with their insurance.

Through my current employer, I have the choice of Aetna or nothing.

Again you failed to address my original point and everything you said is not backed up by facts. Again I point to what we pay in health care cost compared to the rest of the develop world were we are paying over double.

So you want the competition which has driven up the healthcare cost in the US way out of line with the rest of the developed world?
If it was so great then healthcare cost would be coming down not sky rocketing way out of line with everyone else.

There's no real competition now.....it's all segregated by state. Get rid of the state by state restrictions and throw in some tort reform and costs will at the very least level off.